RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!
Richard, why isn't Elizabeth Warren on your list? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Let's see, the Democrats have Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden as possible candidates for the next presidential election. The Republicans have Ted Cruz, Scott Walker, Rick Perry, Marco Rubio, Nikki Haley, Chris Christie, Rand Paul, Bobby Jindal, Paul Ryan, Mike Pence, Rick Santorum, and Jeb Bush. Go figure. Here are a six reasons I won't be supporting Hillary Clinton: 1. She was in favor of invading Afghanistan. 2. She was opposed to a surge in Afghanistan. 3. She was in favor of invading Iraq. 4. She was opposed to the surge in Iraq. 5. She failed to protect the U.S. consulate in Benghazi. 6. She lied about the Benghazi attack and tried to cover it up, blaming it on a video. You probably won't be this on MSNBC any time soon: 'Why is Hillary Clinton's popularity sliding?' The Week: http://theweek.com/hillary-clintons-popularity-sliding http://theweek.com/article/index/252160/why-is-hillary-clintons-popularity-sliding 'New Poll Shows Democratic Incumbents in Big Trouble' Newsbusters: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mother-jones-shocker http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2013/11/01/mother-jones-shocker-new-poll-shows-democratic-incumbents-big-trouble#ixzz2jPrsL4lG On 11/1/2013 2:08 PM, Share Long wrote: Ha! Just proves that Emily and Judy don't know me at all. I would never vote for Hillary because IMO she acted like a door mat when she didn't divorce Bill after the Monica affair. On Fri, 11/1/13, emilymaenot@... mailto:emilymaenot@... emilymaenot@... mailto:emilymaenot@... wrote: Subject: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years! To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, November 1, 2013, 1:49 PM
RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!
This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: It is really strange behavior to say the least. Judy is a real case, and I'm not the first person to note that she can be very disagreeable. WARNING: Don't ever suggest that Hillary Clinton is not a fit candidate to be the next U.S. President! So, I probably posted hundreds of on-topic posts to a.m.t. on Usenet, (some of which I've updated and posted to FFL), over a period of about five years starting in 1999, without getting a single response from Judy. Then, in about 2001, a few days after I posted a message calling into question Judy's claim that Bush lied about the reason the U.S. invaded Iraq, I started getting all kinds of nasty messages from Judy. She went just about ape-shit, calling me a troll and a scumbag and a liar. She encouraged everyone on the list to shun me and has been doing so almost every week since then - for over ten years! Apparently Judy has some influence over the Minions, Pips and Mean Girls on FFL but she doesn't seem to be getting the best of you. Keep up the good work http://www.rwilliams.us/usenet/archives.htm http://www.rwilliams.us/archives.htm Has anyone else in the group noticed that Judy is picking on Share? While my beef with Judy may have some substance, Share seems like a pretty decent person who just likes to talk with people. Regardless of what Judy has said about me, I find her antagonism toward Share to be very mean-spirited. Judy really has taken a turn for the worse, in my opinion . Go figure. But, even more strange is the silence from some of the other informants posting here. Where I come from, silence usually indicates agreement. Thanks for speaking out. On 11/1/2013 9:47 AM, Share Long wrote: Yeah, Richard, that was definitely weird. Judy had always been so friendly before that! On Friday, November 1, 2013 9:41 AM, Richard J. Williams punditster@... mailto:punditster@... wrote: Yeah, I think we had this conversation recently and several nasty comments were posted by Judy and Emily about Share making this same point. Go figure. ...both told me I should be drinking up to three litres of liquid a day for my body to function at its best. On 10/31/2013 10:54 AM, cardemaister@... mailto:cardemaister@... wrote: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2480491/How-drinking-litres-water-day-took-years-face.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2480491/How-drinking-litres-water-day-took-years-face.html
RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!
Yes, it's weird how consistent I am in reacting negatively to people who obfuscate and lie and pretend to be someone they're not, isn't it? BTW, here's my first post to that thread: http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/357343 http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/357343 Not exactly one of my nastier posts. But Share didn't like being corrected one bit and proceeded to emit clouds and clouds of smelly obfuscation and toxic reality-avoidance--you know, the usual. What a surprise that she wouldn't get a friendly response. What a surprise that she would attempt to mislead us now about that thread from September. BTW, this wasn't about Share making this same point as the ditzy woman from the Daily Mail. The point in question with Share was the now-debunked myth she was promoting that if you feel thirsty, you're already dehydrated. The Daily Mail lady didn't mention that; she was just babbling about how she felt and (thought she) looked much better when she drank three liters of water a day. In fact, contrary to what she claims her doctors told her, there's no earthly reason to drink that much water, no evidence at all that it does you any good. That was the point I made in the post I linked to above (with references to recent research), the point that sent Share into her Mr. Hyde mode. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Yeah, Richard, that was definitely weird. Judy had always been so friendly before that! On Friday, November 1, 2013 9:41 AM, Richard J. Williams punditster@... wrote: Yeah, I think we had this conversation recently and several nasty comments were posted by Judy and Emily about Share making this same point. Go figure. ...both told me I should be drinking up to three litres of liquid a day for my body to function at its best. On 10/31/2013 10:54 AM, cardemaister@... mailto:cardemaister@... wrote: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2480491/How-drinking-litres-water-day-took-years-face.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2480491/How-drinking-litres-water-day-took-years-face.html
RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!
This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Come on Judy- tell us how you fibbed about setting a 'macro' up in Yahoo Neo. LoL! On 11/1/2013 10:22 AM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote: This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: It is really strange behavior to say the least. Judy is a real case, and I'm not the first person to note that she can be very disagreeable. WARNING: Don't ever suggest that Hillary Clinton is not a fit candidate to be the next U.S. President! So, I probably posted hundreds of on-topic posts to a.m.t. on Usenet, (some of which I've updated and posted to FFL), over a period of about five years starting in 1999, without getting a single response from Judy. Then, in about 2001, a few days after I posted a message calling into question Judy's claim that Bush lied about the reason the U.S. invaded Iraq, I started getting all kinds of nasty messages from Judy. She went just about ape-shit, calling me a troll and a scumbag and a liar. She encouraged everyone on the list to shun me and has been doing so almost every week since then - for over ten years! Apparently Judy has some influence over the Minions, Pips and Mean Girls on FFL but she doesn't seem to be getting the best of you. Keep up the good work http://www.rwilliams.us/usenet/archives.htm http://www.rwilliams.us/archives.htm Has anyone else in the group noticed that Judy is picking on Share? While my beef with Judy may have some substance, Share seems like a pretty decent person who just likes to talk with people. Regardless of what Judy has said about me, I find her antagonism toward Share to be very mean-spirited. Judy really has taken a turn for the worse, in my opinion . Go figure. But, even more strange is the silence from some of the other informants posting here. Where I come from, silence usually indicates agreement. Thanks for speaking out. On 11/1/2013 9:47 AM, Share Long wrote: Yeah, Richard, that was definitely weird. Judy had always been so friendly before that! On Friday, November 1, 2013 9:41 AM, Richard J. Williams punditster@... mailto:punditster@... wrote: Yeah, I think we had this conversation recently and several nasty comments were posted by Judy and Emily about Share making this same point. Go figure. ...both told me I should be drinking up to three litres of liquid a day for my body to function at its best. On 10/31/2013 10:54 AM, cardemaister@... mailto:cardemaister@... wrote: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2480491/How-drinking-litres-water-day-took-years-face.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2480491/How-drinking-litres-water-day-took-years-face.html
RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!
This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Well, thanks, Judy, for making my case. This shouldn't be too difficult to verify. I already posted the links to some of my on-topic posts to a.m.t., so anyone can see Judy didn't respond to a single one. And, anyone can do a simple search on Usenet to see her responses to my off-topic comments: Just key in IF, judy AND willytex THEN liar ELSE troll. https://groups.google.com/forum/alt.meditation.transcendental https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#%21forum/alt.meditation.transcendental On 11/1/2013 10:22 AM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote: This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: It is really strange behavior to say the least. Judy is a real case, and I'm not the first person to note that she can be very disagreeable. WARNING: Don't ever suggest that Hillary Clinton is not a fit candidate to be the next U.S. President! So, I probably posted hundreds of on-topic posts to a.m.t. on Usenet, (some of which I've updated and posted to FFL), over a period of about five years starting in 1999, without getting a single response from Judy. Then, in about 2001, a few days after I posted a message calling into question Judy's claim that Bush lied about the reason the U.S. invaded Iraq, I started getting all kinds of nasty messages from Judy. She went just about ape-shit, calling me a troll and a scumbag and a liar. She encouraged everyone on the list to shun me and has been doing so almost every week since then - for over ten years! Apparently Judy has some influence over the Minions, Pips and Mean Girls on FFL but she doesn't seem to be getting the best of you. Keep up the good work http://www.rwilliams.us/usenet/archives.htm http://www.rwilliams.us/archives.htm Has anyone else in the group noticed that Judy is picking on Share? While my beef with Judy may have some substance, Share seems like a pretty decent person who just likes to talk with people. Regardless of what Judy has said about me, I find her antagonism toward Share to be very mean-spirited. Judy really has taken a turn for the worse, in my opinion . Go figure. But, even more strange is the silence from some of the other informants posting here. Where I come from, silence usually indicates agreement. Thanks for speaking out. On 11/1/2013 9:47 AM, Share Long wrote: Yeah, Richard, that was definitely weird. Judy had always been so friendly before that! On Friday, November 1, 2013 9:41 AM, Richard J. Williams punditster@... mailto:punditster@... wrote: Yeah, I think we had this conversation recently and several nasty comments were posted by Judy and Emily about Share making this same point. Go figure. ...both told me I should be drinking up to three litres of liquid a day for my body to function at its best. On 10/31/2013 10:54 AM, cardemaister@... mailto:cardemaister@... wrote: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2480491/How-drinking-litres-water-day-took-years-face.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2480491/How-drinking-litres-water-day-took-years-face.html
RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!
Richard, don't you need to take the garbage out or sweep the driveway or something? I'm sure I was just giving Share objective feedback on her fear-based behavior of believing every Tim, Dick, and Skip who tells her what she should be doing for her health without applying any common sense or subjective interpretation. I have nothing against drinking water; I'm all for it. Just don't do it out of a throw-away plastic bottle that isn't biodegradable. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Yeah, I think we had this conversation recently and several nasty comments were posted by Judy and Emily about Share making this same point. Go figure. ...both told me I should be drinking up to three litres of liquid a day for my body to function at its best. On 10/31/2013 10:54 AM, cardemaister@... mailto:cardemaister@... wrote: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2480491/How-drinking-litres-water-day-took-years-face.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2480491/How-drinking-litres-water-day-took-years-face.html
RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!
Well, speaking as a Democrat I'd say that Hillary Clinton is not a fit candidate. Mainly because I don't think the American people would ever elect her! ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: It is really strange behavior to say the least. Judy is a real case, and I'm not the first person to note that she can be very disagreeable. WARNING: Don't ever suggest that Hillary Clinton is not a fit candidate to be the next U.S. President! So, I probably posted hundreds of on-topic posts to a.m.t. on Usenet, (some of which I've updated and posted to FFL), over a period of about five years starting in 1999, without getting a single response from Judy. Then, in about 2001, a few days after I posted a message calling into question Judy's claim that Bush lied about the reason the U.S. invaded Iraq, I started getting all kinds of nasty messages from Judy. She went just about ape-shit, calling me a troll and a scumbag and a liar. She encouraged everyone on the list to shun me and has been doing so almost every week since then - for over ten years! Apparently Judy has some influence over the Minions, Pips and Mean Girls on FFL but she doesn't seem to be getting the best of you. Keep up the good work http://www.rwilliams.us/usenet/archives.htm http://www.rwilliams.us/archives.htm Has anyone else in the group noticed that Judy is picking on Share? While my beef with Judy may have some substance, Share seems like a pretty decent person who just likes to talk with people. Regardless of what Judy has said about me, I find her antagonism toward Share to be very mean-spirited. Judy really has taken a turn for the worse, in my opinion . Go figure. But, even more strange is the silence from some of the other informants posting here. Where I come from, silence usually indicates agreement. Thanks for speaking out. On 11/1/2013 9:47 AM, Share Long wrote: Yeah, Richard, that was definitely weird. Judy had always been so friendly before that! On Friday, November 1, 2013 9:41 AM, Richard J. Williams punditster@... mailto:punditster@... wrote: Yeah, I think we had this conversation recently and several nasty comments were posted by Judy and Emily about Share making this same point. Go figure. ...both told me I should be drinking up to three litres of liquid a day for my body to function at its best. On 10/31/2013 10:54 AM, cardemaister@... mailto:cardemaister@... wrote: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2480491/How-drinking-litres-water-day-took-years-face.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2480491/How-drinking-litres-water-day-took-years-face.html
RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!
Why don't you think the American people would elect her? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Well, speaking as a Democrat I'd say that Hillary Clinton is not a fit candidate. Mainly because I don't think the American people would ever elect her! ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: It is really strange behavior to say the least. Judy is a real case, and I'm not the first person to note that she can be very disagreeable. WARNING: Don't ever suggest that Hillary Clinton is not a fit candidate to be the next U.S. President! So, I probably posted hundreds of on-topic posts to a.m.t. on Usenet, (some of which I've updated and posted to FFL), over a period of about five years starting in 1999, without getting a single response from Judy. Then, in about 2001, a few days after I posted a message calling into question Judy's claim that Bush lied about the reason the U.S. invaded Iraq, I started getting all kinds of nasty messages from Judy. She went just about ape-shit, calling me a troll and a scumbag and a liar. She encouraged everyone on the list to shun me and has been doing so almost every week since then - for over ten years! Apparently Judy has some influence over the Minions, Pips and Mean Girls on FFL but she doesn't seem to be getting the best of you. Keep up the good work http://www.rwilliams.us/usenet/archives.htm http://www.rwilliams.us/archives.htm Has anyone else in the group noticed that Judy is picking on Share? While my beef with Judy may have some substance, Share seems like a pretty decent person who just likes to talk with people. Regardless of what Judy has said about me, I find her antagonism toward Share to be very mean-spirited. Judy really has taken a turn for the worse, in my opinion . Go figure. But, even more strange is the silence from some of the other informants posting here. Where I come from, silence usually indicates agreement. Thanks for speaking out. On 11/1/2013 9:47 AM, Share Long wrote: Yeah, Richard, that was definitely weird. Judy had always been so friendly before that! On Friday, November 1, 2013 9:41 AM, Richard J. Williams punditster@... mailto:punditster@... wrote: Yeah, I think we had this conversation recently and several nasty comments were posted by Judy and Emily about Share making this same point. Go figure. ...both told me I should be drinking up to three litres of liquid a day for my body to function at its best. On 10/31/2013 10:54 AM, cardemaister@... mailto:cardemaister@... wrote: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2480491/How-drinking-litres-water-day-took-years-face.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2480491/How-drinking-litres-water-day-took-years-face.html
RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!
This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. Richard wrote: It shouldn't take a private communication for you to explain to us how you set up a 'macro' in Yahoo Neo. Don't tell me you used Microsoft Word to set the macro and then you copy and paste into the Neo text box! How do you manage all those Word docs, anyway? Are you doing this on company time? I hope you're not charging your customers for this because that wouldn't be very fair. Do you work by the hour, by the number of words you edit, or by the piece in your home office? On 11/1/2013 12:01 PM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote: This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Come on Judy- tell us how you fibbed about setting a 'macro' up in Yahoo Neo. LoL! On 11/1/2013 10:22 AM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote: This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here takes Richard seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: It is really strange behavior to say the least. Judy is a real case, and I'm not the first person to note that she can be very disagreeable. WARNING: Don't ever suggest that Hillary Clinton is not a fit candidate to be the next U.S. President! So, I probably posted hundreds of on-topic posts to a.m.t. on Usenet, (some of which I've updated and posted to FFL), over a period of about five years starting in 1999, without getting a single response from Judy. Then, in about 2001, a few days after I posted a message calling into question Judy's claim that Bush lied about the reason the U.S. invaded Iraq, I started getting all kinds of nasty messages from Judy. She went just about ape-shit, calling me a troll and a scumbag and a liar. She encouraged everyone on the list to shun me and has been doing so almost every week since then - for over ten years! Apparently Judy has some influence over the Minions, Pips and Mean Girls on FFL but she doesn't seem to be getting the best of you. Keep up the good work http://www.rwilliams.us/usenet/archives.htm http://www.rwilliams.us/archives.htm Has anyone else in the group noticed that Judy is picking on Share? While my beef with Judy may have some substance, Share seems like a pretty decent person who just likes to talk with people. Regardless of what Judy has said about me, I find her antagonism toward Share to be very mean-spirited. Judy really has taken a turn for the worse, in my opinion . Go figure. But, even more strange is the silence from some of the other informants posting here. Where I come from, silence usually indicates agreement. Thanks for speaking out. On 11/1/2013 9:47 AM, Share Long wrote: Yeah, Richard, that was definitely weird. Judy had always been so friendly before that! On Friday, November 1, 2013 9:41 AM, Richard J. Williams punditster@... mailto:punditster@... wrote: Yeah, I think we had this conversation recently and several nasty comments were posted by Judy and Emily about Share making this same point. Go figure. ...both told me I should be drinking up to three litres of liquid a day for my body to function at its best. On 10/31/2013 10:54 AM, cardemaister@... mailto:cardemaister@... wrote: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2480491/How-drinking-litres-water-day-took-years-face.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2480491/How-drinking-litres-water-day-took-years-face.html
RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!
Because she hopes it will annoy me if she says so, of course. As if...! emilymaenot wrote: Why don't you think the American people would elect her? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Well, speaking as a Democrat I'd say that Hillary Clinton is not a fit candidate. Mainly because I don't think the American people would ever elect her! ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: It is really strange behavior to say the least. Judy is a real case, and I'm not the first person to note that she can be very disagreeable. WARNING: Don't ever suggest that Hillary Clinton is not a fit candidate to be the next U.S. President! So, I probably posted hundreds of on-topic posts to a.m.t. on Usenet, (some of which I've updated and posted to FFL), over a period of about five years starting in 1999, without getting a single response from Judy. Then, in about 2001, a few days after I posted a message calling into question Judy's claim that Bush lied about the reason the U.S. invaded Iraq, I started getting all kinds of nasty messages from Judy. She went just about ape-shit, calling me a troll and a scumbag and a liar. She encouraged everyone on the list to shun me and has been doing so almost every week since then - for over ten years! Apparently Judy has some influence over the Minions, Pips and Mean Girls on FFL but she doesn't seem to be getting the best of you. Keep up the good work http://www.rwilliams.us/usenet/archives.htm http://www.rwilliams.us/archives.htm Has anyone else in the group noticed that Judy is picking on Share? While my beef with Judy may have some substance, Share seems like a pretty decent person who just likes to talk with people. Regardless of what Judy has said about me, I find her antagonism toward Share to be very mean-spirited. Judy really has taken a turn for the worse, in my opinion . Go figure. But, even more strange is the silence from some of the other informants posting here. Where I come from, silence usually indicates agreement. Thanks for speaking out. On 11/1/2013 9:47 AM, Share Long wrote: Yeah, Richard, that was definitely weird. Judy had always been so friendly before that! On Friday, November 1, 2013 9:41 AM, Richard J. Williams punditster@... mailto:punditster@... wrote: Yeah, I think we had this conversation recently and several nasty comments were posted by Judy and Emily about Share making this same point. Go figure. ...both told me I should be drinking up to three litres of liquid a day for my body to function at its best. On 10/31/2013 10:54 AM, cardemaister@... mailto:cardemaister@... wrote: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2480491/How-drinking-litres-water-day-took-years-face.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2480491/How-drinking-litres-water-day-took-years-face.html
RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!
I know...I was just teasing her because she is so transparent about it! LOL ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Because she hopes it will annoy me if she says so, of course. As if...! emilymaenot wrote: Why don't you think the American people would elect her? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Well, speaking as a Democrat I'd say that Hillary Clinton is not a fit candidate. Mainly because I don't think the American people would ever elect her! ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: It is really strange behavior to say the least. Judy is a real case, and I'm not the first person to note that she can be very disagreeable. WARNING: Don't ever suggest that Hillary Clinton is not a fit candidate to be the next U.S. President! So, I probably posted hundreds of on-topic posts to a.m.t. on Usenet, (some of which I've updated and posted to FFL), over a period of about five years starting in 1999, without getting a single response from Judy. Then, in about 2001, a few days after I posted a message calling into question Judy's claim that Bush lied about the reason the U.S. invaded Iraq, I started getting all kinds of nasty messages from Judy. She went just about ape-shit, calling me a troll and a scumbag and a liar. She encouraged everyone on the list to shun me and has been doing so almost every week since then - for over ten years! Apparently Judy has some influence over the Minions, Pips and Mean Girls on FFL but she doesn't seem to be getting the best of you. Keep up the good work http://www.rwilliams.us/usenet/archives.htm http://www.rwilliams.us/archives.htm Has anyone else in the group noticed that Judy is picking on Share? While my beef with Judy may have some substance, Share seems like a pretty decent person who just likes to talk with people. Regardless of what Judy has said about me, I find her antagonism toward Share to be very mean-spirited. Judy really has taken a turn for the worse, in my opinion . Go figure. But, even more strange is the silence from some of the other informants posting here. Where I come from, silence usually indicates agreement. Thanks for speaking out. On 11/1/2013 9:47 AM, Share Long wrote: Yeah, Richard, that was definitely weird. Judy had always been so friendly before that! On Friday, November 1, 2013 9:41 AM, Richard J. Williams punditster@... mailto:punditster@... wrote: Yeah, I think we had this conversation recently and several nasty comments were posted by Judy and Emily about Share making this same point. Go figure. ...both told me I should be drinking up to three litres of liquid a day for my body to function at its best. On 10/31/2013 10:54 AM, cardemaister@... mailto:cardemaister@... wrote: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2480491/How-drinking-litres-water-day-took-years-face.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2480491/How-drinking-litres-water-day-took-years-face.html
RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!
Richard, you and Share are too easily spoon-fed; grow on up now, it's time. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Maybe because Hillary lied and tried to cover up about the Benghazi attack that killed the U.S. Ambassador, and then tried to blame it on a video? On 11/1/2013 1:29 PM, emilymaenot@... mailto:emilymaenot@... wrote: Why don't you think the American people would elect her? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Well, speaking as a Democrat I'd say that Hillary Clinton is not a fit candidate. Mainly because I don't think the American people would ever elect her! ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: It is really strange behavior to say the least. Judy is a real case, and I'm not the first person to note that she can be very disagreeable. WARNING: Don't ever suggest that Hillary Clinton is not a fit candidate to be the next U.S. President! So, I probably posted hundreds of on-topic posts to a.m.t. on Usenet, (some of which I've updated and posted to FFL), over a period of about five years starting in 1999, without getting a single response from Judy. Then, in about 2001, a few days after I posted a message calling into question Judy's claim that Bush lied about the reason the U.S. invaded Iraq, I started getting all kinds of nasty messages from Judy. She went just about ape-shit, calling me a troll and a scumbag and a liar. She encouraged everyone on the list to shun me and has been doing so almost every week since then - for over ten years! Apparently Judy has some influence over the Minions, Pips and Mean Girls on FFL but she doesn't seem to be getting the best of you. Keep up the good work http://www.rwilliams.us/usenet/archives.htm http://www.rwilliams.us/archives.htm Has anyone else in the group noticed that Judy is picking on Share? While my beef with Judy may have some substance, Share seems like a pretty decent person who just likes to talk with people. Regardless of what Judy has said about me, I find her antagonism toward Share to be very mean-spirited. Judy really has taken a turn for the worse, in my opinion . Go figure. But, even more strange is the silence from some of the other informants posting here. Where I come from, silence usually indicates agreement. Thanks for speaking out. On 11/1/2013 9:47 AM, Share Long wrote: Yeah, Richard, that was definitely weird. Judy had always been so friendly before that! On Friday, November 1, 2013 9:41 AM, Richard J. Williams punditster@... mailto:punditster@... wrote: Yeah, I think we had this conversation recently and several nasty comments were posted by Judy and Emily about Share making this same point. Go figure. ...both told me I should be drinking up to three litres of liquid a day for my body to function at its best. On 10/31/2013 10:54 AM, cardemaister@... mailto:cardemaister@... wrote: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2480491/How-drinking-litres-water-day-took-years-face.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2480491/How-drinking-litres-water-day-took-years-face.html
RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!
Ha! Just proves that Emily and Judy don't know me at all. I would never vote for Hillary because IMO she acted like a door mat when she didn't divorce Bill after the Monica affair. On Fri, 11/1/13, emilymae...@yahoo.com emilymae...@yahoo.com wrote: Subject: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years! To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, November 1, 2013, 1:49 PM I know...I was just teasing her because she is so transparent about it! LOL ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Because she hopes it will annoy me if she says so, of course. As if...! emilymaenot wrote: Why don't you think the American people would elect her? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Well, speaking as a Democrat I'd say that Hillary Clinton is not a fit candidate. Mainly because I don't think the American people would ever elect her! ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: It is really strange behavior to say the least. Judy is a real case, and I'm not the first person to note that she can be very disagreeable. WARNING: Don't ever suggest that Hillary Clinton is not a fit candidate to be the next U.S. President! So, I probably posted hundreds of on-topic posts to a.m.t. on Usenet, (some of which I've updated and posted to FFL), over a period of about five years starting in 1999, without getting a single response from Judy. Then, in about 2001, a few days after I posted a message calling into question Judy's claim that Bush lied about the reason the U.S. invaded Iraq, I started getting all kinds of nasty messages from Judy. She went just about ape-shit, calling me a troll and a scumbag and a liar. She encouraged everyone on the list to shun me and has been doing so almost every week since then - for over ten years! Apparently Judy has some influence over the Minions, Pips and Mean Girls on FFL but she doesn't seem to be getting the best of you. Keep up the good work http://www.rwilliams.us/usenet/archives.htm Has anyone else in the group noticed that Judy is picking on Share? While my beef with Judy may have some substance, Share seems like a pretty decent person who just likes to talk with people. Regardless of what Judy has said about me, I find her antagonism toward Share to be very mean-spirited. Judy really has taken a turn for the worse, in my opinion . Go figure. But, even more strange is the silence from some of the other informants posting here. Where I come from, silence usually indicates agreement. Thanks for speaking out. On 11/1/2013 9:47 AM, Share Long wrote: Yeah, Richard, that was definitely weird. Judy had always been so friendly before that! On Friday, November 1, 2013 9:41 AM, Richard J. Williams punditster@... wrote: Yeah, I think we had this conversation recently and several nasty comments were posted by Judy and Emily about Share making this same point. Go figure. ...both told me I should be drinking up to three litres of liquid a day for my body to function at its best. On 10/31/2013 10:54 AM, cardemaister@... wrote: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2480491/How-drinking-litres-water-day-took-years-face.html
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!
Share, I am forced to retract my statement of your intelligence, at least for today. I'm sorry. Don't hold it against me, O.K.? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Ha! Just proves that Emily and Judy don't know me at all. I would never vote for Hillary because IMO she acted like a door mat when she didn't divorce Bill after the Monica affair. On Fri, 11/1/13, emilymaenot@... mailto:emilymaenot@... emilymaenot@... mailto:emilymaenot@... wrote: Subject: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years! To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, November 1, 2013, 1:49 PM I know...I was just teasing her because she is so transparent about it! LOL ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Because she hopes it will annoy me if she says so, of course. As if...! emilymaenot wrote: Why don't you think the American people would elect her? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Well, speaking as a Democrat I'd say that Hillary Clinton is not a fit candidate. Mainly because I don't think the American people would ever elect her! ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: It is really strange behavior to say the least. Judy is a real case, and I'm not the first person to note that she can be very disagreeable. WARNING: Don't ever suggest that Hillary Clinton is not a fit candidate to be the next U.S. President! So, I probably posted hundreds of on-topic posts to a.m.t. on Usenet, (some of which I've updated and posted to FFL), over a period of about five years starting in 1999, without getting a single response from Judy. Then, in about 2001, a few days after I posted a message calling into question Judy's claim that Bush lied about the reason the U.S. invaded Iraq, I started getting all kinds of nasty messages from Judy. She went just about ape-shit, calling me a troll and a scumbag and a liar. She encouraged everyone on the list to shun me and has been doing so almost every week since then - for over ten years! Apparently Judy has some influence over the Minions, Pips and Mean Girls on FFL but she doesn't seem to be getting the best of you. Keep up the good work http://www.rwilliams.us/usenet/archives.htm http://www.rwilliams.us/usenet/archives.htm Has anyone else in the group noticed that Judy is picking on Share? While my beef with Judy may have some substance, Share seems like a pretty decent person who just likes to talk with people. Regardless of what Judy has said about me, I find her antagonism toward Share to be very mean-spirited. Judy really has taken a turn for the worse, in my opinion . Go figure. But, even more strange is the silence from some of the other informants posting here. Where I come from, silence usually indicates agreement. Thanks for speaking out. On 11/1/2013 9:47 AM, Share Long wrote: Yeah, Richard, that was definitely weird. Judy had always been so friendly before that! On Friday, November 1, 2013 9:41 AM, Richard J. Williams punditster@... wrote: Yeah, I think we had this conversation recently and several nasty comments were posted by Judy and Emily about Share making this same point. Go figure. ...both told me I should be drinking up to three litres of liquid a day for my body to function at its best. On 10/31/2013 10:54 AM, cardemaister@... wrote: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2480491/How-drinking-litres-water-day-took-years-face.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2480491/How-drinking-litres-water-day-took-years-face.html
RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!
This is all trolling, stuff Willytex (and Barry) made up. If anyone here takes either of them seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: The incidents of Judy calling me a troll and a liar are way too numerous to detail here. However, I must have hurt Judy's feelings pretty badly to receive all this invective for all these years. Go figure. A lot of this has to do with Judy's obvious prejudice against people from Texas - that's why she loves to call me by my email address (willytex@...). And, this kind of prejudice is not just apparent in Judy's vitriol - it's in a lot of posts by the two Barrys too. We're not too big on racial profiling down here in San Antonio since the population is 63% Hispanic. I can't think of any other reason than this for Judy's rants against me - it certainly doesn't make any sense. I guess that's why you were asking why she hates me so. It's probably all my fault that she came over here to FFL in the first place. Maybe this will help explain a few things - this one is a classic: What is the REAL reason our Judykins quit a.m.t.? It's because of the genius of willytex. Ms. Stein had been in her usual put-down manner chastising both myself and Delia because we had allegedly accused John Manning of anti-semitism in some of his posts. Willytex did his homework and reposted some past rantings of Manning's in which he was not only exposed of being anti-semitic but virtually admitted to it (and, to his credit, apologized for it and, not to his credit, promised to repent, so to speak, which he didn't). And it was none other than a past post of Judy's which told John he was being prejudiced. This was such an obvious rebuke to Judy and her foaming-at-the-mouth accusations that she was deathly afraid of being exposed. So the easiest course to take was to just quit rather than being shown to be on the wrong side of a debate. Which, for her, is worse than having a root canal without pain-killers. And, of course, it didn't help much to have someone of Delia's caliber to counter her bombastic holier-than-thou politically-correct liberalism. Author: Shemp McGurk Subject: The REAL reason Judy quit a.m.t. Forum: alt.meditation.transcendental Date: January 5, 2003 https://groups.google.com/forum/alt.meditation.transcendental/willytex https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#%21topicsearchin/alt.meditation.transcendental/willytex$20AND$20and$20AND$20liar$20AND$20authorname$3A%22judy$20stein%22%7Csort:date/alt.meditation.transcendental/_jRf0qepd1M On 11/1/2013 1:18 PM, sharelong60@... mailto:sharelong60@... wrote: Well, speaking as a Democrat I'd say that Hillary Clinton is not a fit candidate. Mainly because I don't think the American people would ever elect her! ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: It is really strange behavior to say the least. Judy is a real case, and I'm not the first person to note that she can be very disagreeable. WARNING: Don't ever suggest that Hillary Clinton is not a fit candidate to be the next U.S. President! So, I probably posted hundreds of on-topic posts to a.m.t. on Usenet, (some of which I've updated and posted to FFL), over a period of about five years starting in 1999, without getting a single response from Judy. Then, in about 2001, a few days after I posted a message calling into question Judy's claim that Bush lied about the reason the U.S. invaded Iraq, I started getting all kinds of nasty messages from Judy. She went just about ape-shit, calling me a troll and a scumbag and a liar. She encouraged everyone on the list to shun me and has been doing so almost every week since then - for over ten years! Apparently Judy has some influence over the Minions, Pips and Mean Girls on FFL but she doesn't seem to be getting the best of you. Keep up the good work http://www.rwilliams.us/usenet/archives.htm http://www.rwilliams.us/archives.htm Has anyone else in the group noticed that Judy is picking on Share? While my beef with Judy may have some substance, Share seems like a pretty decent person who just likes to talk with people. Regardless of what Judy has said about me, I find her antagonism toward Share to be very mean-spirited. Judy really has taken a turn for the worse, in my opinion . Go figure. But, even more strange is the silence from some of the other informants posting here. Where I come from, silence usually indicates agreement. Thanks for speaking out. On 11/1/2013 9:47 AM, Share Long wrote: Yeah, Richard, that was definitely weird. Judy had always been so friendly before that! On Friday, November 1, 2013 9:41 AM, Richard J. Williams punditster@... mailto:punditster@... wrote: Yeah, I think we had this conversation
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!
Why would Hillary divorce him over that? He had already had numerous affairs after he became governor in Arkansas - you don't understand the motivation of such a person - its better to have a philandering husband who is President than a faithful one who is a nobody. On Fri, 11/1/13, emilymae...@yahoo.com emilymae...@yahoo.com wrote: Subject: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years! To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, November 1, 2013, 7:21 PM Share, I am forced to retract my statement of your intelligence, at least for today. I'm sorry. Don't hold it against me, O.K.? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Ha! Just proves that Emily and Judy don't know me at all. I would never vote for Hillary because IMO she acted like a door mat when she didn't divorce Bill after the Monica affair. On Fri, 11/1/13, emilymaenot@... emilymaenot@... wrote: Subject: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years! To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, November 1, 2013, 1:49 PM I know...I was just teasing her because she is so transparent about it! LOL ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Because she hopes it will annoy me if she says so, of course. As if...! emilymaenot wrote: Why don't you think the American people would elect her? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Well, speaking as a Democrat I'd say that Hillary Clinton is not a fit candidate. Mainly because I don't think the American people would ever elect her! ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: It is really strange behavior to say the least. Judy is a real case, and I'm not the first person to note that she can be very disagreeable. WARNING: Don't ever suggest that Hillary Clinton is not a fit candidate to be the next U.S. President! So, I probably posted hundreds of on-topic posts to a.m.t. on Usenet, (some of which I've updated and posted to FFL), over a period of about five years starting in 1999, without getting a single response from Judy. Then, in about 2001, a few days after I posted a message calling into question Judy's claim that Bush lied about the reason the U.S. invaded Iraq, I started getting all kinds of nasty messages from Judy. She went just about ape-shit, calling me a troll and a scumbag and a liar. She encouraged everyone on the list to shun me and has been doing so almost every week since then - for over ten years! Apparently Judy has some influence over the Minions, Pips and Mean Girls on FFL but she doesn't seem to be getting the best of you. Keep up the good work http://www.rwilliams.us/usenet/archives.htm Has anyone else in the group noticed that Judy is picking on Share? While my beef with Judy may have some substance, Share seems like a pretty decent person who just likes to talk with people. Regardless of what Judy has said about me, I find her antagonism toward Share to be very mean-spirited. Judy really has taken a turn for the worse, in my opinion . Go figure. But, even more strange is the silence from some of the other informants posting here. Where I come from, silence usually indicates agreement. Thanks for speaking out. On 11/1/2013 9:47 AM, Share Long wrote: Yeah, Richard, that was definitely weird. Judy had always been so friendly before that! On Friday, November 1, 2013 9:41 AM, Richard J. Williams punditster@... wrote
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!
Um, and you think we think you would vote for Hillary why, Share? You seem to have missed a step there. It doesn't surprise me even the tiniest bit, BTW, that you wouldn't vote for Hillary because she didn't divorce Bill. Share fumbled: Ha! Just proves that Emily and Judy don't know me at all. I would never vote for Hillary because IMO she acted like a door mat when she didn't divorce Bill after the Monica affair. On Fri, 11/1/13, emilymaenot@... mailto:emilymaenot@... emilymaenot@... mailto:emilymaenot@... wrote: Subject: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years! To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, November 1, 2013, 1:49 PM I know...I was just teasing her because she is so transparent about it! LOL ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Because she hopes it will annoy me if she says so, of course. As if...! emilymaenot wrote: Why don't you think the American people would elect her? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Well, speaking as a Democrat I'd say that Hillary Clinton is not a fit candidate. Mainly because I don't think the American people would ever elect her!
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!
MJ, IMO, that's where Hillary should have drawn the line with regards to his womanizing. I mean, that affair occurred on the world stage! And the woman was so young! I've read that Hillary really loves Bill. Even more reason she should have stopped enabling him. Long overdue IMO. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Why would Hillary divorce him over that? He had already had numerous affairs after he became governor in Arkansas - you don't understand the motivation of such a person - its better to have a philandering husband who is President than a faithful one who is a nobody. On Fri, 11/1/13, emilymaenot@... mailto:emilymaenot@... emilymaenot@... mailto:emilymaenot@... wrote: Subject: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years! To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, November 1, 2013, 7:21 PM Share, I am forced to retract my statement of your intelligence, at least for today. I'm sorry. Don't hold it against me, O.K.? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Ha! Just proves that Emily and Judy don't know me at all. I would never vote for Hillary because IMO she acted like a door mat when she didn't divorce Bill after the Monica affair. On Fri, 11/1/13, emilymaenot@... emilymaenot@... wrote: Subject: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years! To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, November 1, 2013, 1:49 PM I know...I was just teasing her because she is so transparent about it! LOL ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Because she hopes it will annoy me if she says so, of course. As if...! emilymaenot wrote: Why don't you think the American people would elect her? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Well, speaking as a Democrat I'd say that Hillary Clinton is not a fit candidate. Mainly because I don't think the American people would ever elect her! ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com mailto:fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: It is really strange behavior to say the least. Judy is a real case, and I'm not the first person to note that she can be very disagreeable. WARNING: Don't ever suggest that Hillary Clinton is not a fit candidate to be the next U.S. President! So, I probably posted hundreds of on-topic posts to a.m.t. on Usenet, (some of which I've updated and posted to FFL), over a period of about five years starting in 1999, without getting a single response from Judy. Then, in about 2001, a few days after I posted a message calling into question Judy's claim that Bush lied about the reason the U.S. invaded Iraq, I started getting all kinds of nasty messages from Judy. She went just about ape-shit, calling me a troll and a scumbag and a liar. She encouraged everyone on the list to shun me and has been doing so almost every week since then - for over ten years! Apparently Judy has some influence over the Minions, Pips and Mean Girls on FFL but she doesn't seem to be getting the best of you. Keep up the good work http://www.rwilliams.us/usenet/archives.htm http://www.rwilliams.us/usenet/archives.htm Has anyone else in the group noticed that Judy is picking on Share? While my beef with Judy may have some substance, Share seems like a pretty decent person who just likes to talk with people. Regardless of what Judy has said about me, I find her antagonism toward Share to be very mean-spirited. Judy really has taken a turn for the worse, in my opinion . Go figure. But, even more strange is the silence from some of the other informants posting here. Where I come from, silence usually indicates agreement. Thanks for speaking out. On 11/1/2013 9:47 AM, Share Long wrote: Yeah, Richard, that was definitely weird. Judy had always been so friendly before
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!
What we should all recognize (but only some of us have the smarts to understand) is that NOBODY KNOWS what goes on inside a marriage but the two people in it. (Unless they choose to tell us; Bill and Hillary chose not to tell us what went on between them with regard to the Monica affair. And good for them; it's none of our damn business.) We cannot know what contingencies, agreements, understandings, conditions, promises, etc., etc., are operative in a given marriage (ESPECIALLY when it's one we see only from a distance through the media). It is the absolute height of arrogant stupidity to declare that he or she or they should have done this, that, or the other thing in connection with a marital problem. It's fine to say, If I were Hillary, I would have done thus-and-so. (Although obviously you don't really know what you would have done given that you don't know what it's like to be married to Bill.) But for all we know, it could have been Bill who was the doormat in this situation. Think about it. If you don't see how that might have been the case, you have a very limited imagination, not to mention knowledge of human beings. (Caveat for the brainlessly literal-minded: I'm not saying I think that WAS the case, just that it could have been. It could have been a lot of other things too. We simply do not know enough to have an opinion.) Share spewed: MJ, IMO, that's where Hillary should have drawn the line with regards to his womanizing. I mean, that affair occurred on the world stage! And the woman was so young! I've read that Hillary really loves Bill. Even more reason she should have stopped enabling him. Long overdue IMO. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Why would Hillary divorce him over that? He had already had numerous affairs after he became governor in Arkansas - you don't understand the motivation of such a person - its better to have a philandering husband who is President than a faithful one who is a nobody.
Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!
I agree that no one knows what goes on in a marriage. However, when one willingly becomes a public figure, then one has to accept that one's private life is also going to come under scrutiny. My opinion is based on the observable behaviors not on what I imagine anyone was thinking or feeling. On Friday, November 1, 2013 3:54 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com wrote: What we should all recognize (but only some of us have the smarts to understand) is that NOBODY KNOWS what goes on inside a marriage but the two people in it. (Unless they choose to tell us; Bill and Hillary chose not to tell us what went on between them with regard to the Monica affair. And good for them; it's none of our damn business.) We cannot know what contingencies, agreements, understandings, conditions, promises, etc., etc., are operative in a given marriage (ESPECIALLY when it's one we see only from a distance through the media). It is the absolute height of arrogant stupidity to declare that he or she or they should have done this, that, or the other thing in connection with a marital problem. It's fine to say, If I were Hillary, I would have done thus-and-so. (Although obviously you don't really know what you would have done given that you don't know what it's like to be married to Bill.) But for all we know, it could have been Bill who was the doormat in this situation. Think about it. If you don't see how that might have been the case, you have a very limited imagination, not to mention knowledge of human beings. (Caveat for the brainlessly literal-minded: I'm not saying I think that WAS the case, just that it could have been. It could have been a lot of other things too. We simply do not know enough to have an opinion.) Share spewed: MJ, IMO, that's where Hillary should have drawn the line with regards to his womanizing. I mean, that affair occurred on the world stage! And the woman was so young! I've read that Hillary really loves Bill. Even more reason she should have stopped enabling him. Long overdue IMO. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Why would Hillary divorce him over that? He had already had numerous affairs after he became governor in Arkansas - you don't understand the motivation of such a person - its better to have a philandering husband who is President than a faithful one who is a nobody.
RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!
Share tries to dig herself out of her hole: I agree that no one knows what goes on in a marriage. However, when one willingly becomes a public figure, then one has to accept that one's private life is also going to come under scrutiny. Yes, this is a recent but very unfortunate development when the private lives in question have no bearing on the ability of the public figure to carry out his or her responsibilities. That it's socially acceptable nowadays does not mean one has to engage in such scrutiny and pronounce one's opinion on it. That is not something a smart person with integrity would want to take advantage of, IMHO. My opinion is based on the observable behaviors not on what I imagine anyone was thinking or feeling. Share, you're only going to embarrass yourself in this discussion. In the first place, I never said it was. But more importantly, you have no idea what went on behind the observable behaviors, and thus you aren't in a position to have an opinion about whether those behaviors were appropriate. Moreover, the observable behaviors don't give you a clue as to whether Hillary was acting like a doormat or enabling Bill. Plus which, of course, you yourself said you had read that Hillary really loves Bill. So your claim to be going only by observable behaviors is self-evidently false. You are lying either to us or to yourself, or both. And you never answered my earlier question: What made you think that Emily and I would think you would vote for Hillary? On Friday, November 1, 2013 3:54 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: What we should all recognize (but only some of us have the smarts to understand) is that NOBODY KNOWS what goes on inside a marriage but the two people in it. (Unless they choose to tell us; Bill and Hillary chose not to tell us what went on between them with regard to the Monica affair. And good for them; it's none of our damn business.) We cannot know what contingencies, agreements, understandings, conditions, promises, etc., etc., are operative in a given marriage (ESPECIALLY when it's one we see only from a distance through the media). It is the absolute height of arrogant stupidity to declare that he or she or they should have done this, that, or the other thing in connection with a marital problem. It's fine to say, If I were Hillary, I would have done thus-and-so. (Although obviously you don't really know what you would have done given that you don't know what it's like to be married to Bill.) But for all we know, it could have been Bill who was the doormat in this situation. Think about it. If you don't see how that might have been the case, you have a very limited imagination, not to mention knowledge of human beings. (Caveat for the brainlessly literal-minded: I'm not saying I think that WAS the case, just that it could have been. It could have been a lot of other things too. We simply do not know enough to have an opinion.) Share spewed: MJ, IMO, that's where Hillary should have drawn the line with regards to his womanizing. I mean, that affair occurred on the world stage! And the woman was so young! I've read that Hillary really loves Bill. Even more reason she should have stopped enabling him. Long overdue IMO. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Why would Hillary divorce him over that? He had already had numerous affairs after he became governor in Arkansas - you don't understand the motivation of such a person - its better to have a philandering husband who is President than a faithful one who is a nobody.
RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!
Fair enough - your opinions, and your vote, are certainly your own, but to cast Hillary as some sort of victim, and an enabler, simply because of what was exposed, I think is short-sighted. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: I agree that no one knows what goes on in a marriage. However, when one willingly becomes a public figure, then one has to accept that one's private life is also going to come under scrutiny. My opinion is based on the observable behaviors not on what I imagine anyone was thinking or feeling. On Friday, November 1, 2013 3:54 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: What we should all recognize (but only some of us have the smarts to understand) is that NOBODY KNOWS what goes on inside a marriage but the two people in it. (Unless they choose to tell us; Bill and Hillary chose not to tell us what went on between them with regard to the Monica affair. And good for them; it's none of our damn business.) We cannot know what contingencies, agreements, understandings, conditions, promises, etc., etc., are operative in a given marriage (ESPECIALLY when it's one we see only from a distance through the media). It is the absolute height of arrogant stupidity to declare that he or she or they should have done this, that, or the other thing in connection with a marital problem. It's fine to say, If I were Hillary, I would have done thus-and-so. (Although obviously you don't really know what you would have done given that you don't know what it's like to be married to Bill.) But for all we know, it could have been Bill who was the doormat in this situation. Think about it. If you don't see how that might have been the case, you have a very limited imagination, not to mention knowledge of human beings. (Caveat for the brainlessly literal-minded: I'm not saying I think that WAS the case, just that it could have been. It could have been a lot of other things too. We simply do not know enough to have an opinion.) Share spewed: MJ, IMO, that's where Hillary should have drawn the line with regards to his womanizing. I mean, that affair occurred on the world stage! And the woman was so young! I've read that Hillary really loves Bill. Even more reason she should have stopped enabling him. Long overdue IMO. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Why would Hillary divorce him over that? He had already had numerous affairs after he became governor in Arkansas - you don't understand the motivation of such a person - its better to have a philandering husband who is President than a faithful one who is a nobody.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!
There's so much featherheaded crap in even Share's shorter utterances, I don't always notice all of it right away. She actually wrote this: (snip) I mean, that affair occurred on the world stage! Hard to believe, eh?
RE: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!
Doc, it's not just because of what was exposed. It was how she reacted to what was exposed. And that she was an enabler, allowing it to happen over and over during all those previous years and doing seemingly little to take a stand against it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Fair enough - your opinions, and your vote, are certainly your own, but to cast Hillary as some sort of victim, and an enabler, simply because of what was exposed, I think is short-sighted. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: I agree that no one knows what goes on in a marriage. However, when one willingly becomes a public figure, then one has to accept that one's private life is also going to come under scrutiny. My opinion is based on the observable behaviors not on what I imagine anyone was thinking or feeling. On Friday, November 1, 2013 3:54 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: What we should all recognize (but only some of us have the smarts to understand) is that NOBODY KNOWS what goes on inside a marriage but the two people in it. (Unless they choose to tell us; Bill and Hillary chose not to tell us what went on between them with regard to the Monica affair. And good for them; it's none of our damn business.) We cannot know what contingencies, agreements, understandings, conditions, promises, etc., etc., are operative in a given marriage (ESPECIALLY when it's one we see only from a distance through the media). It is the absolute height of arrogant stupidity to declare that he or she or they should have done this, that, or the other thing in connection with a marital problem. It's fine to say, If I were Hillary, I would have done thus-and-so. (Although obviously you don't really know what you would have done given that you don't know what it's like to be married to Bill.) But for all we know, it could have been Bill who was the doormat in this situation. Think about it. If you don't see how that might have been the case, you have a very limited imagination, not to mention knowledge of human beings. (Caveat for the brainlessly literal-minded: I'm not saying I think that WAS the case, just that it could have been. It could have been a lot of other things too. We simply do not know enough to have an opinion.) Share spewed: MJ, IMO, that's where Hillary should have drawn the line with regards to his womanizing. I mean, that affair occurred on the world stage! And the woman was so young! I've read that Hillary really loves Bill. Even more reason she should have stopped enabling him. Long overdue IMO. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Why would Hillary divorce him over that? He had already had numerous affairs after he became governor in Arkansas - you don't understand the motivation of such a person - its better to have a philandering husband who is President than a faithful one who is a nobody.
RE: RE: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!
Who knows the truth of it? I kinda agree with Judy on this one, about the public view of private lives, up to a point. For example, that former head of the IMF, who turned out to be a rapist, should be publicly castrated, imo. As far as Bill and Hillary, though, and all of their drama, all I can muster, is a shrug. Wouldn't affect my vote at all. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Doc, it's not just because of what was exposed. It was how she reacted to what was exposed. And that she was an enabler, allowing it to happen over and over during all those previous years and doing seemingly little to take a stand against it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Fair enough - your opinions, and your vote, are certainly your own, but to cast Hillary as some sort of victim, and an enabler, simply because of what was exposed, I think is short-sighted. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: I agree that no one knows what goes on in a marriage. However, when one willingly becomes a public figure, then one has to accept that one's private life is also going to come under scrutiny. My opinion is based on the observable behaviors not on what I imagine anyone was thinking or feeling. On Friday, November 1, 2013 3:54 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: What we should all recognize (but only some of us have the smarts to understand) is that NOBODY KNOWS what goes on inside a marriage but the two people in it. (Unless they choose to tell us; Bill and Hillary chose not to tell us what went on between them with regard to the Monica affair. And good for them; it's none of our damn business.) We cannot know what contingencies, agreements, understandings, conditions, promises, etc., etc., are operative in a given marriage (ESPECIALLY when it's one we see only from a distance through the media). It is the absolute height of arrogant stupidity to declare that he or she or they should have done this, that, or the other thing in connection with a marital problem. It's fine to say, If I were Hillary, I would have done thus-and-so. (Although obviously you don't really know what you would have done given that you don't know what it's like to be married to Bill.) But for all we know, it could have been Bill who was the doormat in this situation. Think about it. If you don't see how that might have been the case, you have a very limited imagination, not to mention knowledge of human beings. (Caveat for the brainlessly literal-minded: I'm not saying I think that WAS the case, just that it could have been. It could have been a lot of other things too. We simply do not know enough to have an opinion.) Share spewed: MJ, IMO, that's where Hillary should have drawn the line with regards to his womanizing. I mean, that affair occurred on the world stage! And the woman was so young! I've read that Hillary really loves Bill. Even more reason she should have stopped enabling him. Long overdue IMO. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Why would Hillary divorce him over that? He had already had numerous affairs after he became governor in Arkansas - you don't understand the motivation of such a person - its better to have a philandering husband who is President than a faithful one who is a nobody.
RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!
I still don't understand how Clinton could have been so well, dumb. Was she really that attractive?! Ok, maybe he cracked under the pressure of the job. But really, so much about it is unfathomable. Must be karma (-: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Who knows the truth of it? I kinda agree with Judy on this one, about the public view of private lives, up to a point. For example, that former head of the IMF, who turned out to be a rapist, should be publicly castrated, imo. As far as Bill and Hillary, though, and all of their drama, all I can muster, is a shrug. Wouldn't affect my vote at all. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Doc, it's not just because of what was exposed. It was how she reacted to what was exposed. And that she was an enabler, allowing it to happen over and over during all those previous years and doing seemingly little to take a stand against it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Fair enough - your opinions, and your vote, are certainly your own, but to cast Hillary as some sort of victim, and an enabler, simply because of what was exposed, I think is short-sighted. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: I agree that no one knows what goes on in a marriage. However, when one willingly becomes a public figure, then one has to accept that one's private life is also going to come under scrutiny. My opinion is based on the observable behaviors not on what I imagine anyone was thinking or feeling. On Friday, November 1, 2013 3:54 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: What we should all recognize (but only some of us have the smarts to understand) is that NOBODY KNOWS what goes on inside a marriage but the two people in it. (Unless they choose to tell us; Bill and Hillary chose not to tell us what went on between them with regard to the Monica affair. And good for them; it's none of our damn business.) We cannot know what contingencies, agreements, understandings, conditions, promises, etc., etc., are operative in a given marriage (ESPECIALLY when it's one we see only from a distance through the media). It is the absolute height of arrogant stupidity to declare that he or she or they should have done this, that, or the other thing in connection with a marital problem. It's fine to say, If I were Hillary, I would have done thus-and-so. (Although obviously you don't really know what you would have done given that you don't know what it's like to be married to Bill.) But for all we know, it could have been Bill who was the doormat in this situation. Think about it. If you don't see how that might have been the case, you have a very limited imagination, not to mention knowledge of human beings. (Caveat for the brainlessly literal-minded: I'm not saying I think that WAS the case, just that it could have been. It could have been a lot of other things too. We simply do not know enough to have an opinion.) Share spewed: MJ, IMO, that's where Hillary should have drawn the line with regards to his womanizing. I mean, that affair occurred on the world stage! And the woman was so young! I've read that Hillary really loves Bill. Even more reason she should have stopped enabling him. Long overdue IMO. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Why would Hillary divorce him over that? He had already had numerous affairs after he became governor in Arkansas - you don't understand the motivation of such a person - its better to have a philandering husband who is President than a faithful one who is a nobody.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] 3 liters of H2O per day -- minus 10 years!
Says Share, still trying desperately to annoy me even though Doc has clearly indicated he has no desire to dump on either of the Clintons: I still don't understand how Clinton could have been so well, dumb. Was she really that attractive?! Ok, maybe he cracked under the pressure of the job. But really, so much about it is unfathomable. Must be karma (-: But you keep right on going, Share. The entertainment value here is very high. Come on, tell us more about Bill and Hill's karma. We just can't wait to hear. Doc wrote: Who knows the truth of it? I kinda agree with Judy on this one, about the public view of private lives, up to a point. For example, that former head of the IMF, who turned out to be a rapist, should be publicly castrated, imo. As far as Bill and Hillary, though, and all of their drama, all I can muster, is a shrug. Wouldn't affect my vote at all. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Doc, it's not just because of what was exposed. It was how she reacted to what was exposed. And that she was an enabler, allowing it to happen over and over during all those previous years and doing seemingly little to take a stand against it. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Fair enough - your opinions, and your vote, are certainly your own, but to cast Hillary as some sort of victim, and an enabler, simply because of what was exposed, I think is short-sighted. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: I agree that no one knows what goes on in a marriage. However, when one willingly becomes a public figure, then one has to accept that one's private life is also going to come under scrutiny. My opinion is based on the observable behaviors not on what I imagine anyone was thinking or feeling. On Friday, November 1, 2013 3:54 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote: What we should all recognize (but only some of us have the smarts to understand) is that NOBODY KNOWS what goes on inside a marriage but the two people in it. (Unless they choose to tell us; Bill and Hillary chose not to tell us what went on between them with regard to the Monica affair. And good for them; it's none of our damn business.) We cannot know what contingencies, agreements, understandings, conditions, promises, etc., etc., are operative in a given marriage (ESPECIALLY when it's one we see only from a distance through the media). It is the absolute height of arrogant stupidity to declare that he or she or they should have done this, that, or the other thing in connection with a marital problem. It's fine to say, If I were Hillary, I would have done thus-and-so. (Although obviously you don't really know what you would have done given that you don't know what it's like to be married to Bill.) But for all we know, it could have been Bill who was the doormat in this situation. Think about it. If you don't see how that might have been the case, you have a very limited imagination, not to mention knowledge of human beings. (Caveat for the brainlessly literal-minded: I'm not saying I think that WAS the case, just that it could have been. It could have been a lot of other things too. We simply do not know enough to have an opinion.) Share spewed: MJ, IMO, that's where Hillary should have drawn the line with regards to his womanizing. I mean, that affair occurred on the world stage! And the woman was so young! I've read that Hillary really loves Bill. Even more reason she should have stopped enabling him. Long overdue IMO. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote: Why would Hillary divorce him over that? He had already had numerous affairs after he became governor in Arkansas - you don't understand the motivation of such a person - its better to have a philandering husband who is President than a faithful one who is a nobody.
